Attributing Political Colours To Judgments Is An Act Of Contempt Of Gravest Form: SC [Read Judgment]
"Whenever any political matter comes to the Court and is decided, either way, political insinuations are attributed by unscrupulous persons/advocates. Such acts are nothing, but an act of denigrating the judiciary itself and destroys the faith of the common man which he reposes in the judicial system."
The Supreme Court, in its judgment quashing Rules 14A to 14D of the Rules of High Court of Madras, 1970, observed that attributing political colours to the judgments is nothing less than an act of contempt of gravest form. Justice Arun Mishra, who authored the judgment for the bench also comprising of Justice Vineet Saran, observed that it has become very common to the members of...
The Supreme Court, in its judgment quashing Rules 14A to 14D of the Rules of High Court of Madras, 1970, observed that attributing political colours to the judgments is nothing less than an act of contempt of gravest form.
Justice Arun Mishra, who authored the judgment for the bench also comprising of Justice Vineet Saran, observed that it has become very common to the members of the Bar to go to the press/media to criticize the judges in person and to attribute political colours to the judgments.
The bench said: "Whenever any political matter comes to the Court and is decided, either way, political insinuations are attributed by unscrupulous persons/advocates. Such acts are nothing, but an act of denigrating the judiciary itself and destroys the faith of the common man which he reposes in the judicial system. In case of genuine grievance against any judge, the appropriate process is to lodge a complaint to the concerned higher authorities who can take care of the situation and it is impermissible to malign the system itself by attributing political motives and by making false allegations against the judicial system and its functionaries. Judges who are attacked are not supposed to go to press or media to ventilate their point of view."
Some Advocate Feel They Are The Only Champion Of The Causes.
Justice Mishra further observed that some advocates feel that they are above the Bar Council due to its inaction and they are the only champion of the causes.
"The hunger for cheap publicity is increasing which is not permitted by the noble ideals cherished by the great doyens of the bar, they have set by their conduct what should be in fact the professional etiquettes and ethics which are not capable of being defined in a narrow compass. The statutory rules prohibit advocates from advertising and in fact to cater to the press/media, distorted versions of the court proceedings is sheer misconduct and contempt of court which has become very common. It is making it more difficult to render justice in a fair, impartial and fearless manner though the situation is demoralizing that something has to be done by all concerned to revamp the image of Bar. It is not open to wash dirty linen in public and enter in accusation/debates, which tactics are being adopted by unscrupulous elements to influence the judgments and even to deny justice with ulterior motives.", the bench said.
Absolutely Necessary To Remove Black Sheeps From The Profession
The bench added that it is for the Bar Council and the senior members of the Bar to rise to the occasion to maintain the independence of the Bar. It added: " The Bar Council of India under its supervisory control can implement good ideas as always done by it and would not lag behind in cleaning process so badly required. It is to make the profession more noble and it is absolutely necessary to remove the black sheeps from the profession to preserve the rich ideals of Bar and on which it struggled for the values of freedom."
Read The Judgment